Printable Format58-2204. Form of quitclaim deed. Any conveyance of lands, worded in substance as follows: A.B. quitclaims to C.D. (here describe the premises), for the sum of (here insert the consideration), the said conveyance being duly signed and acknowledged by the grantor, shall be deemed to be a good and sufficient conveyance in quitclaim to the grantee, his or her heirs and assigns.
History: L. 1887, ch. 151, ยง 2; June 20; R.S. 1923, 67-204.
Cross References to Related Sections:
Effect of deeds of quitclaim upon public lands, see 16-110.
Law Review and Bar Journal References:
"Mr. Dacey and His Book," James K. Logan, 36 J.B.A.K. 181, 224 (1967).
Survey of Kansas law on real and personal property (1965-1969), 18 K.L.R. 427, 428 (1970).
"Survey of Kansas Law: Real and Personal Property," Deanell R. Tacha, 27 K.L.R. 283, 284 (1979).
"Railroad Right of Way: The Real Property Interest in Kansas," Tim Pittman, 25 W.L.J. 327, 333 (1986).
"Title and Related Considerations in Conveying Kansas Water Rights," John C. Peck, 66 J.K.B.A. No. 9, 38 (1997).
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Prior unrecorded deed held inferior to a quitclaim deed. Eger v. Brown, 77 Kan. 510, 94 P. 803.
2. Subsequent quitclaim deed held superior to unrecorded quitclaim deed. Ennis v. Tucker, 78 Kan. 55, 96 P. 140.
3. Grantee accepted quitclaim deed supposing it was warranty deed; effect. Peck v. Ayres, 79 Kan. 457, 461, 100 P. 283.
4. Purchaser by quitclaim deed; rights superior to unrecorded warranty deed. Tucker v. Gibson, 80 Kan. 90, 101 P. 633.
5. Valuable consideration must be shown to defeat prior unrecorded deed. Morris v. Wicks, 81 Kan. 790, 106 P. 1048.
6. Rights of party taking under quitclaim deed considered. Flick v. Murdock, 115 Kan. 862, 867, 225 P. 119.
7. Quitclaim deed does not guarantee owner has anything. Platt v. Woodland, 121 Kan. 291, 296, 246 P. 1017.
8. Words "bargains, sells and transfers absolutely" sufficient to convey title. Hinchliffe v. Fischer, 198 Kan. 365, 367, 368, 424 P.2d 581.
9. Applied in determining property assigned by "Mother Hubbard" clause in conveyance valid as between parties; ineffective as to subsequent purchasers without knowledge. Luthi v. Evans, 223 Kan. 622, 626, 629, 576 P.2d 1064.
10. Principles, presumptions and burdens of proof relating to delivery of deeds stated and applied. Johannes v. Idol, 39 Kan. App. 2d 595, 603, 181 P.3d 574 (2008).